User talk:Drb021

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! The Prince (talk) 12:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Speedy deletion nomination of Wikipedia Story
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Wikipedia Story, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 05:26, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Re
It doesn't pass the criteria outlined under WP:NOTE I will elaborate tomorrow, but I am heading off to bed. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 06:34, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I can agree that Wikipedia Story technically goes against WP:NOTE, but I would like to show that this is something that takes more scrutiny than the technicalities of our rules, and that WP:IAR is relevant, and here's why: Wikipedia Story naturally can not be notable (in the WP:NOTE sense) when it starts, this is an inherent property of Wikipedia Story as its purpose is to both reference itself and create itself at the same time. It NEEDs to violate WP:NOTE by its own definition, but does it need to always violate WP:NOTE? The answer to that question is no. For Wikipedia to deny the ultimate existence of something that could one day adhere to its standards DOES fall under WP:IAR, "If a rule prevents you from improving or maintaining Wikipedia, ignore it." For Wikipedia's standards of notability to prevent an idea, that does not yet exist, from ever existing. That IS the standards of notability preventing the improvement of Wikipedia. The issue is not a conventional one and probably has not been handled before and was probably never even thought of while creating the WP:NOTE standards, and that's why I say it should be handled separately from the other cases of notability.

So what do we do?

Instead of letting the standards decide, we let ourselves decide the notability of such an issue. By this I mean any page's creation that describes something that inherently can not become notable or referenced until it has existed as an article on Wikipedia--I do not know that there could be any other such entity other than Wikipedia Story, but generalizing the issue allows us to capture a more judicial sense. Should Wikipedia really deny something's ultimate existence with just a quick scan of the rules? I believe the answer is no, things of such a nature deserve more thought than that. . So now, why is Wikipedia Story notable, in the actual sense of the term, not the WPNOTE sense of the term. Wikipedia Story is something that has never been done before. Yes, there is collaborative fiction, but this is something different. It is collaborative fiction, and NONFICTION, all in the same strokes of the keyboard. It is allowing a fictitious story to be defined by the Wikipedia article that describes that fictitious story. It shows us what Wikipedia is, what Wikipedia isn't, and most importantly what Wikipedia CAN be. It most certainly is notable in the sense of the term, and Wikipedia's community of administrators should at least give it the chance to become notable within WP:NOTE with a bit of time.

Also to note, Wikipedia Story was actually deleted due to "vandalism," although it met none of the criteria under the G3 code of vandalism, and when I wrote a lengthy argument similar but more focused on the aspects of vandalism my response was thus: ''I stand by my decision to delete via G3. SchuminWeb (Talk) 12:50, 17 January 2010 (UTC) '' Although this isn't so relevant to the argument for Wikipedia Story's notability, it is relevant to the quality of administration that goes on within Wikipedia.

(Drb021 (talk) 00:34, 18 January 2010 (UTC))

Sorry, I didn't mean to not respond. Firstly, talking to the deleting admin is the best path to take when contesting a deletion. (In this case SchuminWeb) If the admin stood by his decision (which he did) then the best path to take is to WP:UNDELETE However, because the article did fail WP:GNG and WP:N that it would almost certainly not succeed. Although tagging it as vandalization may not be quite right (as it seems you meant well), it certainly does not seem to meet the guidelines for inclusion. WP:NOT may also be a good read for you.

I don't have the article in front of me, so it is a bit difficult to tell, but you must understand that it matters whether it could become notable, wikipedia does not and can not predict the future, nor make anything notable by being created originally on wikipedia (It requires third party sources). My view on the IAR argument, is that this article did not help or maintain the encyclopedia, as few to no people will want to research the "Wikipedia Story." I discussed this with a few other editors, and this was their general view. I have no problem with you bringing it to WP:UNDELETE but I would not predict favorable results for you. If you have any other concerns feel free to drop me a message, and I really sincerely apologize for not getting back to you sooner. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 07:02, 1 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I believe WP:CRYSTAL also applies to this situation. -- &oelig; &trade; 04:36, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It certainly does. I believe that when he posted on my talk page i responded as such, but if I didn't it was my intent. NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs 04:41, 5 February 2010 (UTC)